On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:59 AM, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>wrote:
> On Friday, April 26, 2013, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Apr 26, 2013 8:33 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Kevin Smith <zenparsing@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Actually, I may have gotten it terribly wrong (apologies). In my
>> >> > prototype
>> >> > implementation, the following:
>> >> >
>> >> > Future.accept(Future.resolve(1)).then(value => {
>> >> >
>> >> > console.log(value !== 1);
>> >> > return Future.accept(Future.resolve(1));
>> >> >
>> >> > }).then(value => {
>> >> >
>> >> > console.log(value === 1);
>> >> > });
>> >> >
>> >> > logs
>> >> >
>> >> > - true
>> >> > - true
>> >> >
>> >> > Is that what it should be doing, according to the DOM spec? Anne,
>> Alex?
>> >>
>> >> No, it should be "true", then "false".
>> >>
>> >> Future.resolve(1) returns a Future<1>.
>> >>
>> >> Future.accept(Future.resolve(1)) returns Future<Future<1>>.
>> >
>> > This would all be easier to discuss if you weren't writing using
>> invented
>> > methods.
>>
>> I'm using the methods defined in the Futures spec, because we're
>> talking about the behavior of Futures.
>>
>
>
> Ugg...sorry. I wasn't aware the API had grown this much since I last
> looked at it. If there is consensus about the new methods, so be it.
>
There is not. Neither is there consensus about the old ones.
--
Cheers,
--MarkM